Cited as a reason for National Health Insurance, proponents stipulate the millions of Americans who go bankrupt each year due to health-care costs.
What they don't say is that nearly 70% have or had health insurance.
What's missing? The snake still deceives! COBRA just does not do the job.
The dirty little secret is that employees covered by employer-paid-health insurance remain covered only as long as they can work. (For the moment forget about auto workers) Once one is too sick to work, group health insurance stops even if one can afford COBRA. Thus subsequent medical bills accumulate at an alarming rate with no chance of stopping short of death.
A solution pointed out by Paul Zane Pilser in "The New Health Insurance Solution" is for individuals to purchase and own their health insurance policies. That provides complete portability thus eliminating the need for the snake.
What about affordability? In my area of Pennsylvania coverage for my wife and I is over $1200 per month. It includes maternity. In our 60s that isn't high on our list of coverages. However, that same rate applies to a married couple in their 20s.
The same rate for an individual health policy for a couple in their 20s is about $300 per month. The rate goes up as they age but can't be increased due to illness. It can't be canceled due to medical expenses either.
But, young people won't spend money on health insurance. Hey, they'll buy 52 inch High Def TV.
The right incentive isn't in place... "no health insurance no driver license". Too radical? Maybe.
But not compared to National Health Care!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
National Health Insurance. Such a difficult issue. I'm squarely in the middle at the moment, but there are certainly some things that need to be changed! On the other hand, those who say "health care is a right" - I have to take issue with that. Health care costs money, and always will, no matter whether it is the government, a third party, or the individual paying for it - so it is not a "right". However, is it in the best interest of the public, and morally/ethically correct to see to it that all people can have access to basic health care, and what would the particulars of that be? There's the rub. More later.
ReplyDeleteThere is no question that the issue of health care has many facets. Further I agree that it is not a right any more than driving a car. I also agree that it isn't free.... somewhere someone is paying. I do think that it is in the best interest that all have access to health care insurance... I think it a necessity like auto insurance so that the payment vehicle is in place for the medical profession to be compensated. As to the moral and ethical issues... I'm not certain how that plays out. As someone once said, "That's beyond my pay grade."
ReplyDelete